so where's the great internet protest and black out for solidarity in response to this censorship? huh? jimmy wales is busy? larry page is in his hot tub on his private plane? yeah... that's what I thought too... helping this band doesn't help their corporate bottom line so let um' hang... nice internet, and I thought you actually cared about censorship... guess not... pass the free beer... (burp).

Are you talking to me? I can't decipher your gibberish.

Seriously, if you could make one single concise point, it'd be mighty helpful.

There is currently room for anything on the internet, corporate shills and independent civilian bloggers alike.

You're missing the point.

The point is that a very large percentage of your so-called "independent civilian bloggers" are in reality paid corporate shills - and the average person has no way to tell which is which. In fact, many of your "independent civilian bloggers" who are not directly backed by corporations and believe they are independent are infiltrated by or under the influence of corporate shills and don't even know it. The recent anti-SOPA campaign is a prime example.

We're gonna start a new band and name it Expensive Pussy Riot and donate all the proceeds to freeing Free Pussy Riot. At this very moment, we're drawing up a contract that clearly defines what monies are costs and what monies are proceeds. So please, support Expensive Pussy Riot and you'll be standing tall to Free Pussy Riot.

Seriously, do it, it'll be a riot. The first single we're working on is "My Pussy is in the Slammer." We in no way intend to offend, we're just trying to get into the Pussy Riot state of mind.

maybe in your country. in the us much of 'news' pieces, especially on the local news... the fluff pieces, the lifestyle, the human interest, the celebrity, the health and science stuff.. are usually just press releases from whoever is pushing what and are passed off as 'news' and information.

when you get to more of the national broadcast news, it shows up there as well at times, but more from much more powerful interests than the 'broccoli is healthy for you' growers association that will show up in the local news health segment

In many countries there are such regulations. Not in the US, sadly, which is why Fox News is not allowed to broadcast in Canada.

I would bet that at least some of the news outlets you believe are independent are not.

Your paranoia is impressive.

Since we're playing bets, I would bet you watch Fox News. No offense, you just have that kinda vibe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Eppstein

Mature, too!

He seems to have an aggressive response to most everything.

If you say so. If someone says something that doesn't address the matter at hand, then I might post a picture of Nick Cage with bird-hair. If that's aggressive, you should probably go get a prescription for xanax.

Since we're playing bets, I would bet you watch Fox News. No offense, you just have that kinda vibe.

You lose.

Quote:

If you say so. If someone says something that doesn't address the matter at hand, then I might post a picture of Nick Cage with bird-hair. If that's aggressive, you should probably go get a prescription for xanax.

It's rude and childish.

And you're an expert at dragging things off topic with your ad hominem attacks.

It's interesting to see the Google (and The Atlantic) is doing a backhanded attempt to discredit the movement by somehow equating it with the Kony fiasco.

If you read the Atlantic article and took from it that conclusion, I'd suggest that it might be worth your while to re-read it. The article certainly does not discredit the motivation of those who support Pussy Riot; it rather reasons with those who are outraged at Pussy Riot's circumstances to consider also the broader issue of the Russian government's general-case treatment of political activism and activists. It seems to me a fair point to make, and a reasonable context to add: the media-friendly band Pussy Riot has captured the West's attention, but the author hopes that this attention can expand to include other unjustly imprisoned and threatened Russian political activists.

If you read the Atlantic article and took from it that conclusion, I'd suggest that it might be worth your while to re-read it. The article certainly does not discredit the motivation of those who support Pussy Riot; it rather reasons with those who are outraged at Pussy Riot's circumstances to consider also the broader issue of the Russian government's general-case treatment of political activism and activists. It seems to me a fair point to make, and a reasonable context to add: the media-friendly band Pussy Riot has captured the West's attention, but the author hopes that this attention can expand to include other unjustly imprisoned and threatened Russian political activists.

agreed. but do let me know when the big internet/google sponsored protest is going to be, I want to make sure I'm ready with all those google and wikipedia approved anti-censorship logos and graphics...

and from the op:

Quote:

For those who remain confused about the difference between FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION and FREE BEER (er uhm music) please read this report from Amnesty International regarding Pussy Riot and do take action.

Freedom of Expression is truly a right to be protected and preserved, as ARTISTS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS:

The thought that grown men would think that corporate-owned television news is more open and free than the internet is frankly maddening.

The fact you ignore financial manipulation on the internet is deeply naive.
I already told you, people are paid a fee to make supposedly personal tweets.
At least traditional broadcast is heavily scrutinized and legislated, and we can experience Russian TV, the BBC, PBS, Fox and Al jezeera and come to a balanced view based on all angles.
Bought bias on the net is at present unknown and insidious.